single player vs multi player? what do you think?

#1 Multiplayer. Simply because you dont have to worry about coding much AI and you can create teams of friends or foes. Work together to do things or try and stop people from doing things.

#2 Single player first. If my game becomes noticed, I might release and multiplayer version if I can catch up on some of those multiplayer books and resources, and find the massive amounts of time/dedication needed.

#3 Single player. Having ideas of plot, story and scripted events over just running about, frenetically blowing stuff to bits.

A story mode that actually has a story (*gasp*), rather than the flimsiest of backstory/excuses for carnage, which is what most multi-million dollar, 3A games have.

I just read this Gamasutra article on bad writing in gaming.
www.gamasutra.com/blogs/AdamVolk/20090303/589/REVENGE_OF_THE_WRITER_MONKEY.php

#4 single player and if people like it allot and want to see a multiplayer version then i can make a multiplayer version.

i also don't want to have all the multiplayer problems not on my first game.

#5 Why not both? Torque makes that easy enough, given that even when you're doing single-player you actually are doing multiplayer. I think the single-player should come first, but solid multiplayer, even if it's just drop-in co-op on the single-player game, realy enhances the game and allows people to have more fun with it - as well as opening possibilities for things like machinima, which might requie people to collaborate on a scene. You can't exactly order bots around to get the shot you want ;P.
Steve - thanks for the article! And I tend to agree with your ideas about plot and story ;).
But I might mention that I wouldn't say AI should be simpler for multiplayer games - indeed, AI in a multiplayer game will have to be more flexible and interact believably and effectively in a wider range of situations than in the single-player, where you can control the entire experience.
What? You are putting bots into the game, aren't you? Because if you don't...
;P

#6 Working on a small purely play-for-fun game, no intense focus needed and is all about multiplayer, though we're thinking about throwing in some AI elements.

Next project is focused on single player, I like's them plots 'n stuff ;) but will have multiplayer playability (Haven't decided if it's going to be co-op on the normal maps, or a completely seperate MP part)

#7 Both single (with an actual story) and multiplayer (co-op and/or teamplay). Just remember that multiplayer can be much more than deathmatch or run & gun skirmishes. Regardless of play mode just make it fun.

#8 Why not a mix of the two...
A multiplayer game that includes missions/stages that each individual character/player must complete solo before the story/game can progress. This would force the multiple players to play as a team, trategically helping each other with their individual trials and challenges. There would also be stages/challenges where they would have to play cooperatively/multiplayer mode in order to progress (massive battle, secure village, etc.). These individual stages/challenges would help to develope the individual characters, adding to the story as a whole. Just think, a multiplayer game with a general story about 4 characters (give or take) and their trials/tribulations with a brief (maybe) background on each...

OR...

a multiplayer game with not only a general storyline about the characters, but smaller storylines focused on developing each character WITH the game play to back it up. Might build a stronger player/character connection.

Just a thought

#9 Multiplayer but provides a single player mode.

#10 Single and multi are used for very different game types. If you're making an RTS like Starcraft, the focus should probably be on multiplayer. If you're making a Zelda-style action-adventure with a bunch of puzzles, single is usually best. If you're making a Contra-style shoot-em-up, you probably want to mix the two and go with multiplayer cooperative. It really depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

EDIT: Also, a lot of games benefit from having more than one mode. Rainbow Six, for example, has some good single-player action, and it needs to be able to be played by a lone person. But in some modes, it's more fun to play along with a friend. And finally, competitive online play lets players experience the game in a new (and deeper) way and allows more teamwork and greater replayability. So really, all modes of that game are good.

#11 THERE IT IS!!! The game name-dropping! I think THIS is what kills the indie developer...a game like this or a game like that. We as indies should strive to look at these big name games and say "hmm, now how can I be more creative, more original than that" without mimicking the game. If we are going to compare our games to their games, lets say to ourselves "now thats a great game...but they forgot some things" and then start developing a game that not only sees their game play, but raises the bar by a notch or two. True there are certain aspects that just about all RTS, FPS, OR RPG games have in common, however that does not mean that these aspects can not be expanded, improved or (wait for it...) creatively added to with new aspects. We could be the first to be able to say "ya know, the big guys never thought of including...in their RPG, FPS, RTS, until they saw it used in our (the indie community) games WE started that, and raised the bar on game play creativity at the same time". Mode selection (single or multiple player) has been done...and done again...and again. Why not say "hey gamers, heres a game that REQUIRES you to complete your own missions (maybe for special weapons specific to your character or for items that only "the wizard" (for example) can and must retrieve in order for the rest of the team to continue the journey) as well as play cooperatively (missions/obstacle/levels that will require the strengths of all characters to complete)". AND to spice it up a bit include some cut-scenes that will aid in developing the characters personality, background, etc while completing these solitary missions (RELEVANT CUT-SCENES). I hate to rant but...I rant, sorry. I just feel that we as indies are at a disadvantage, graphically, when competing with the big guys but creative game play and storylines is an open playing field for us all. The hairs on my neck stand up for about a month when I hear an indie say "I want to make a game like Halo or Final Fantasy or Starcraft". In my opinion (and yes I know what they say about opinions) that is the first step in the wrong direction when coming up with a game idea. Inspired by this game or that game is one thing. Make a game like this one or that one is...well...its just wrong.

...Amen

#12

Quote:I just feel that we as indies are at a disadvantage, graphically, when competing with the big guys but creative game play and storylines is an open playing field for us all.

Well said.

I do feel that the rabid fixation with graphics lies more with marketing men than the actual players.

#13 wow Libra that was the hardest post to read ever where is the spacing. :P

its was good to read though and very very true i am kind of basing my game off a really really old game but as that game is 2.5D and my game is going to be 3D its still going to be very different i not even going to make the battle system the same. not only that now that i been working on my project i found one other game like it so i think i going to buy that game to see if i can come up with more ideas.

though i only thinking of single player right now as theres no way i can implement what i makeing into a multiplayer i can but i don't see people wanting to play a game like that would be to dang hard just to play it. :P i have thought of multiplayer some but i would have to modify the single player allot to make it playable for multiplayer. :P i could always just release a multiplayer version of the single player version but as i would not want to play a game like that i don't see many others wanting to play a game like that. :P

sorry i not telling whats its going to be like not till i am ready to release a beta or something which will not be for some time. i not putting everything together till T3D comes out i mostly just makeing 3d objects and testing code in TGEA. i don't want to have to port everything over to T3D i rather save my self the time. :P

#14 Brandon,
It's refreshing to see someone that thinks to himself "if I wouldn't want to play the game, why would anyone else". It shows that you have confidence in your taste of games. I'm sure there are tons of developers out there that make games and think to themselves "...if this is what the industry wants, OK" without taking the time to consider that alot of people don't realize that they want something until they see it. I hear T3D is suppose to be great and hell, if I were you I wouldn't give my game idea away either (industry big dogs might hear of it and beat you to it, bastards! (lol)).

#15 Wow Brandon, where's the punctuation? The capitalization? The sentence structure? The spelling? The grammar? Surely you jest!

I have to say that Libra raised a very good point -- "I'm going to make my game like <fill in name here>", is entirely the wrong direction when it comes to developing a game, especially for Indies. Generally, my first reaction when someone tells me that a certain game is like <fill in name here> then I lose interest or any desire in experiencing this "new" game. Remakes of games are just as bad as remakes of movies. There's no spark of creativity, no adventure, no sense of something new.

Quote:...creative game play and storylines is an open playing field for us all.

And don't forget about making it fun. Granted the "fun factor" is subjective to each of us, but if I were to make a list of the AAA games that I've played in the last half dozen years that were not fun to play, it would be a blow to all of those who hope to emulate their favorite game.

Quote:I do feel that the rabid fixation with graphics lies more with marketing men than the actual players.

Well said! I've seen plenty of high profile games with amazing graphics that kept me entertained for about 20 minutes... and then I quickly forgot about them.

But back on topic, new games should integrate the elements of both modes of play at the same time -- now that would be something!

#16 @Michael,

Quote:new games should integrate the elements of both modes of play at the same time

elaborate?

#17 ...new games should integrate the elements of both modes of play at the same time ...(how do you do that quote thing?)

New games meaning new releases, new titles, fresh ideas...I think

I will agree with Steve to some extent. Unfortunately, I've heard to many people say exactly what Michael said, "Wow, that game looks awsome". They buy the game, it reaks to high $ell, and then they turn around and buy the next release from that company. There are too many uneducated gamers out there that won't give indie games a chance because they don't look as if it cost a fortune and a half to make them. This is a lose lose lose situation.

1) The gamer misses out on what could be a spectacular game that may generate enough money for a part 2 with the AAA graphics

2) The indie/s producing the game that may be the next "big guy" waiting to happen never happens because of this "judge a book by its cover" attitude

3) The gaming industry ends up stuck with remakes and blasts from the past (not all are bad), possibly decreasing the population of our community because of lack of creativity.

All involved suffer but the buck stops at the gamer. We as indies need to dig deep and come up with outstanding game concepts and ideas that will turn the heads of the industry. I for 1 can say that one of the first steps is (and I read about this in another forum) break out of the game genre titles. FPS, RTS, RPG, ETC... Saying "I want to make an RPG" immediately frames the entire game. What should and should not be in an RPG. How should and how shouldn't an RPG play. I'll bet that we, without the restraints and pressures of the "popular" development companies could find a way to cleverly mix and match elements from 2 or more of these, break the mold, and form completely game genr...game concepts

#18 thanks Libra i think everyone should think of there self if you don't want to play the game when why make it.

Michael:
ya i suck at grammar but thats not going to make anything difference as when i am done i will pay someone to fix all my grammar. you said spelling i don't think any spelling is wrong its just my grammar sucks and will always suck for years to come it has gotten better though over the years.

i have done allot of research and i have a really different perspective of games then most of you and i hope it comes in handy with my first game. i will never give any ideas of mine away i got at lest 5 super unique ones that no one has ever done be for. i might not be starting on one of the super unique ones but this one i think will be a greatest hits game. ok i think i still make this my last post here don't want to spam this all up i want others to post on what they are doing for there games.

#19 I don't think you're the only one that isn't willing to give away your game ideas. I know I haven't.

#20 ...and I can image that english is not your native language. I can asure you that I couldn't speak one word of yours (lol)